Confessions of a displaced, pre-1968 Democrat.

02/14/2014

Nine Thoughts On Michael Sam's Coming Out

What do you think of Michael Sam? That’s the question that’s posed to sports fans, of which I am one, regarding the announcement by the Missouri defensive end, preparing to enter the NFL draft this spring, that he is gay. Sam, who won Defensive Player of the Year in the SEC, will almost certainly be the first openly gay player in the NFL next fall.

So what do I think of Michael Sam? I suppose the place to begin is to cite what the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I believe to be infallible on faith and morals, protected by the Holy Spirit from error, says on the subject of homosexuality. Here are the relevant passages…

***********************

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity [Cf. Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10], tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."[Cf.

They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

***********************

Now, here are nine points on how I see that pertaining to Michael Sam…

*The first and most important is this—why do people really think that I, or the vast majority of opponents of same-sex marriage, really care about Michael Sam’s sexual practices? I mean seriously? Professional sports—for that matter, life itself—is filled with people who do things that contradict the teachings of the Catholic Church, and that’s a list that includes myself all too frequently. Really, I have better things to worry about, and if my favorite NFL team, the Washington Redskins, thinks Sam can help them win, then draft him.

*I suspect the real meaning behind the question, “what do you think of Michael Sam”, is code for “what do you think of homosexual acts?" I think they’re wrong.

*The Church teaching also says homosexuals should not be subject to any unjust discrimination. Stopping Michael Sam from playing football—or even creating an environment where he has to walk on eggshells or fear bullying—would, in my view, constitute unjust discrimination. Let him play.

*Picking up on the above point, as Catholics, we also don’t believe in artificial birth control or unmarried sex, but we don’t insist that those who violate these teachings—even willfully and defiantly—not have the opportunity to advance in their chosen field. It would be unjust to hold gays to a higher standard.

*Gay rights activists are very aggressive in linking their cause to the civil rights movements for African-Americans. I don’t agree. Race is not sexual preference. The latter requires specific acts to consummate, and even at that, the acts are (or should be) private. The color of a person’s skin is quite different. The gay rights-civil rights linkage is convenient, but not accurate.

*Sam’s coming out is the second major coming out of an NFL athlete in the last three years. The other was Tim Tebow, who came out of a different kind of closet. I don’t mean that Tebow said he was a Christian—that’s common enough. I mean that Tebow went a step further and said he was a virgin. Even the slightest amount of time around a sports team tells you there are almost certainly fewer virgins than gays.

*Therefore, if you don’t treat Sam and Tebow the same, you are being inconsistent and unfair. For the record, while I think Tebow’s choices are admirable, I was always queasy when he came out as a virgin. It fell into the “that’s more than I needed to know” category. But anyone that is celebrating Sam, after sitting in grudging silence or opposition to Tebow has a serious deficiency in basic fairness.

*Gay rights activists are also being very aggressive about saying that they are on the right side of history. Time will tell, but we do have one test case to go by. Perhaps no great Empire in history was more tolerant of a wide variety of sexual practice than the Roman Empire. At the same time, the Catholic Church stood as firm as ever that there was one right way to do things. Just out of curiosity, did the Empire or the Church last longer?

*Finally, to rebuke the very point I just made, why should the verdict of history even matter? If you really think that anybody four centuries from now is going to remember what any of us thought, get over yourself. Worrying about what history will say is vain, and suggests worrying more about what people think of you than about what is right. If you truly believe homosexual practice is right, then whether you’re on the “right side of history” shouldn’t matter. And if you think, deep down, that there is something just a little unnatural about it all, don’t worry—none of us are important enough for history to condemn or praise. Just do what you think is right.